Whoopi displays TDS in effort to deny TDS

[*PhilHos*]

Honestly, I gotta side with those that say Piro started it (and I like her), though I think bfine has a point int hat Whoopi's response was not proportionate to the criticism levied at her.

HOWEVER, let's not act like this isn't the standard for Whoopi and other hosts/former-hosts of the View when certain conservatives are guests on the show. I've seen countless clips of Whoopie and Joy Behart and Rosie O'Donnell and others shouting at Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter and others. So while Pirro was wrong in ad hominem attacking Whoopi, it's not like there wasn't going to be shouting on the show anyways.

[*bfine32*]

(07-23-2018, 01:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: What you are trying to do is claim that Whoopi got upset at the mere mention of Trump instead of getting upset over being personally insulted.
and you are pretending that Judge Pirro said anything about how people will react to being insulted to their face.

As I said: No one can say I didn't try.

[GMDino]

(07-23-2018, 02:13 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Honestly, I gotta side with those that say Piro started it (and I like her), though I think bfine has a point int hat Whoopi's response was not proportionate to the criticism levied at her.

HOWEVER, let's not act like this isn't the standard for Whoopi and other hosts/former-hosts of the View when certain conservatives are guests on the show. I've seen countless clips of Whoopie and Joy Behart and Rosie O'Donnell and others shouting at Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter and others. So while Pirro was wrong in ad hominem attacking Whoopi, it's not like there wasn't going to be shouting on the show anyways.

I don't know anyone who watches the show for in depth political reporting!  LOL!

Most watch because they agree with the liberal slant, some just to hate people with a liberal slant. 

Either way these faint of heart viewers would have REALLY hated Crossfire and a lot of the old "debate" shows.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-23-2018, 02:19 PM)GMDino Wrote: I don't know anyone who watches the show for in depth political reporting!  LOL!

Most watch because they agree with the liberal slant, some just to hate people with a liberal slant. 

Either way these faint of heart viewers would have REALLY hated Crossfire and a lot of the old "debate" shows.

I've seen the show a few times for a few minutes, and it is unwatchable for me.  I don't think it's a political thing.  It's a man thing.  Obviously it's geared towards women, and that's fine as long as I don't have to watch.

[fredtoast]

(07-23-2018, 02:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As I said: No one can say I didn't try.

And no one can say that I did not try to give the best answer I could with the info you provided.

[*PhilHos*]

(07-23-2018, 02:19 PM)GMDino Wrote: I don't know anyone who watches the show for in depth political reporting!  LOL!

Sadly, you'd be surprised. It's like the people who watch the Daily Show for their news.

(07-23-2018, 02:19 PM)GMDino Wrote: Most watch because they agree with the liberal slant, some just to hate people with a liberal slant.   

Pretty much goes for ALL politically-slanted shows. According to that movie about Howard Stern from quite a few years ago, there were more people listening to his show that hated him and looked for things to hate on him than were fans listening for pleasure. I don't find this hard to believe at all.

(07-23-2018, 02:19 PM)GMDino Wrote: Either way these faint of heart viewers would have REALLY hated Crossfire and a lot of the old "debate" shows.

It was before my time. Were they actually civil and discussed the ISSUES and not just called each other names? If so, yeah, I can imagine them watching and going, "BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING!"

[*bfine32*]

(07-23-2018, 02:13 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Honestly, I gotta side with those that say Piro started it (and I like her), though I think bfine has a point int hat Whoopi's response was not proportionate to the criticism levied at her.

HOWEVER, let's not act like this isn't the standard for Whoopi and other hosts/former-hosts of the View when certain conservatives are guests on the show. I've seen countless clips of Whoopie and Joy Behart and Rosie O'Donnell and others shouting at Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter and others. So while Pirro was wrong in ad hominem attacking Whoopi, it's not like there wasn't going to be shouting on the show anyways.

Oh, I've clearly said The Judge should not have said what she said; but Fred's inability to crack the code aside; The judge could not have gotten a better reaction from Whoopi. 

[GMDino]

(07-23-2018, 03:18 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Sadly, you'd be surprised. It's like the people who watch the Daily Show for their news.


Pretty much goes for ALL politically-slanted shows. According to that movie about Howard Stern from quite a few years ago, there were more people listening to his show that hated him and looked for things to hate on him than were fans listening for pleasure. I don't find this hard to believe at all.


It was before my time. Were they actually civil and discussed the ISSUES and not just called each other names? If so, yeah, I can imagine them watching and going, "BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING!"

No, they just yelled at each other constantly. 

[fredtoast]

(07-23-2018, 03:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Oh, I've clearly said The Judge should not have said what she said;

O really?

(07-20-2018, 03:52 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course you do; unfortunately for you. the facts are right there in word and video.

The Judge was an invited guest promoting her book, was talking to another host, and Whoopi lost her shit. 

(07-20-2018, 03:56 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I mean who can you help but side with:

One interned at a DA's office in High School, has a Juris Doctor from Albany Law School, was a Judge and District Attorney for the 2nd most populace country in the main land of the state of NY, and was Chair of the New York State Commission on Domestic Violence Fatalities.

The other played in Sister Act 2.

[BmorePat87]

Two irrational people paid to say outlandishly partisan things on TV got into a shouting match when put together?

[fredtoast]

(07-20-2018, 03:19 PM)bfine32 Wrote: To her credit she did admit that TDS got the better of her and apologized for losing her cool.

Actually she never admitted that "TDS got the better of her".  In fact she clearly stated that she did not have TDS.


But I guess that is not what the echo chamber told you to believe.

[*bfine32*]

(07-23-2018, 04:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually she never admitted that "TDS got the better of her".  In fact she clearly stated that she did not have TDS.


But I guess that is not what the echo chamber told you to believe.

OK, new "Fred Rule". If you clearly state you don't have something or are not something: that is all the proof that is required. Words, actions, and deeds are irrelevant.

At least that's how they role outside the echo chamber. 

[fredtoast]

(07-23-2018, 04:07 PM)bfine32 Wrote: OK, new "Fred Rule". If you clearly state you don't have something or are not something: that is all the proof that is required.

New "Bfine rule".  If someone clearly states they don't have something you can disagree with them but you can not flat out lie and claim they said something they never said.

[*bfine32*]

(07-23-2018, 03:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Oh, I've clearly said The Judge should not have said what she said; but Fred's inability to crack the code aside; The judge could not have gotten a better reaction from Whoopi. 

(07-23-2018, 03:59 PM)fredtoast Wrote: O really?

Yes really

bfine32 Wrote:The judge was talking calmly to another host. 

Should she have said it: No. 

Did Whoopi react in a way to support her assertion: (folks can answer for themselves)

 

You're having a rough day. Continually trying to find examples  of someone in the forum being uneducated or dishonest and continually failing miserably at it.

I recommend you log off, drink some water, go for a walk in the fresh air and approach the forum with a renewed since of vigor and energy. Who knows you might be more successful.

[Dill]

(07-23-2018, 03:18 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Sadly, you'd be surprised. It's like the people who watch the Daily Show for their news.

Pretty much goes for ALL politically-slanted shows. According to that movie about Howard Stern from quite a few years ago, there were more people listening to his show that hated him and looked for things to hate on him than were fans listening for pleasure. I don't find this hard to believe at all.

It was before my time. Were they actually civil and discussed the ISSUES and not just called each other names? If so, yeah, I can imagine them watching and going, "BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING!"

Actually, the discussants were pretty "firey".  They wouldn't fit today's shows wells because they were still constrained by facts--even the audience demanded that back in the 70s.  But they certainly raised their voices.

Jane Curtain and Dan Akkroyd's SNL version brings us closer to current political discourse.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c91XUyg9iWM

[fredtoast]

(07-23-2018, 04:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You're having a rough day. Continually trying to find examples  of someone in the forum being uneducated or dishonest and continually failing miserably at it.

I recommend you log off, drink some water, go for a walk in the fresh air and approach the forum with a renewed since of vigor and energy. Who knows you might be more successful.

I am not having a bad day because I am not the one being forced to back off my original statements when people prove me wrong.

In just one page you were forced to go from "You have to take Judge Pirro's side" to "Judge Pirro should never have said that"

[*bfine32*]

(07-23-2018, 05:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I am not having a bad day because I am not the one being forced to back off my original statements when people prove me wrong.

In just one page you were forced to go from "You have to take Judge Pirro's side" to "Judge Pirro should never have said that"

No doubt you've "proved me wrong" and "forced" me to change my stance:

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-23-2018, 04:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: New "Bfine rule".  If someone clearly states they don't have something you can disagree with them but you can not flat out lie and claim they said something they never said.

You making this statement is so rich it gave me diabetes.

[Beaker]

(07-23-2018, 10:39 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You making this statement is so rich it gave me diabetes.

It pains me to max rep a steeler fan.

[fredtoast]

(07-23-2018, 05:45 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No doubt you've "proved me wrong" and "forced" me to change my stance:

(07-23-2018, 10:39 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You making this statement is so rich it gave me diabetes.

(07-25-2018, 08:24 PM)Beaker Wrote: It pains me to max rep a steeler fan.

Link to Goldberg saying "TDS got the better of me."


**sits back and waits for more personal attacks but no facts to prove me wrong.**